The article you cited debunks claims made against the article and it’s author, the main specific claim is that she had no dental problems, the article links to a Youtube video which apparently has her removing dentures (I haven’t watched the video but assume that the summary is accurate). Furthermore it asserts that the only reason that the article is “contested” is that it goes against conservative ideology.

Not sure what you’re trying to say, or if you expect me to respond. I thought readers of the original link would also be interested in the discussions that it prompted, and the huffington article seemed a good starting point since it links back to several other commentaries. I’m not trying to take a specific position here or assert that the statements in the huffington article are in any way more authoritative than anything else that has been written about this issue.

The contesting of that article is like the contesting of climate science by climate change deniers. It’s not based on facts and appears to be motivated by support for political positions which offer a financial benefit to certain parties.

I’m not interested in “teaching the controversy” on my blog. I’m interested in publishing the truth. For any issue there will be people who are wrong, there’s no need to debunk them unless they are particularly amusing or get their ideas spread widely.